Coronavirus COVID-19

[kalm]

Kalm to English translation- “They said those racist things, but they also said some other things. Therefore it’s an issue that needs consideration “

You didn’t read the article Colonel.

[Col Hogan]

Kalm to English translation- “They said those racist things, but they also said some other things. Therefore it’s an issue that needs consideration “

You didn’t read the article Colonel.

From start to finish... the translation stands. Those two are post-partisan racists. Lots of other things were discussed. It’s a tough decision that has to be made. We can Cuomoize the elderly in favor of an overly broad definition of essential, or we can save more lives.

[kalm]

You didn’t read the article Colonel.

From start to finish... the translation stands. Those two are post-partisan racists. Lots of other things were discussed. It’s a tough decision that has to be made. We can Cuomoize the elderly in favor of an overly broad definition of essential, or we can save more lives.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

[GannonFan]

From start to finish... the translation stands. Those two are post-partisan racists. Lots of other things were discussed. It’s a tough decision that has to be made. We can Cuomoize the elderly in favor of an overly broad definition of essential, or we can save more lives.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

No offense, but this borders on stupid. The only reason we are in the position we're in, i.e. parts of the economy completely shuttered and millions unemployed, is that we want to stop the spread of the disease and limit the impact to the vastly most affected part of the population, that being the elderly. This virus is not an economy-shuttering virus because of it's impact on people under 60, the vast majority of those under 60 who get it survive. So when it comes time to vaccinate, why would there be any other central goal that isn't to stop people from dying? Let's be honest, if old people weren't dying from this virus at the levels they are we wouldn't even be talking about COVID, it would just be another flu. If old people aren't dying, then the economy never shuts down, people don't get unemployed, and the disparate impact on minorities would never materialize. The central goal of the committee should have nothing to do with health inequities and everything to do with saving lives.

[Col Hogan]

From start to finish... the translation stands. Those two are post-partisan racists. Lots of other things were discussed. It’s a tough decision that has to be made. We can Cuomoize the elderly in favor of an overly broad definition of essential, or we can save more lives.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

So, you didn’t read the Tweets I posted...they both had pictures and bios of the two racists...

And anytime race is part of a decision on the distribution of medical services, that is classic racism...

[UNI88]

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

No offense, but this borders on stupid. The only reason we are in the position we're in, i.e. parts of the economy completely shuttered and millions unemployed, is that we want to stop the spread of the disease and limit the impact to the vastly most affected part of the population, that being the elderly. This virus is not an economy-shuttering virus because of it's impact on people under 60, the vast majority of those under 60 who get it survive. So when it comes time to vaccinate, why would there be any other central goal that isn't to stop people from dying? Let's be honest, if old people weren't dying from this virus at the levels they are we wouldn't even be talking about COVID, it would just be another flu. If old people aren't dying, then the economy never shuts down, people don't get unemployed, and the disparate impact on minorities would never materialize. The central goal of the committee should have nothing to do with health inequities and everything to do with saving lives.

He should have stopped at "it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks"

Isn't it racist to treat white people poorly because of past inequities? Most can admit that the pendulum of privilege has hovered over white people but why do we want to swing it past equilibrium to where it hovers over POC? Shouldn't we take a long term approach and try to level the playing field not tilt it in the other direction? If we punish whites for their past privilege in the long term we will just be creating future victims who will have a legitimate grievance.

[AZGrizFan]

No offense, but this borders on stupid. The only reason we are in the position we're in, i.e. parts of the economy completely shuttered and millions unemployed, is that we want to stop the spread of the disease and limit the impact to the vastly most affected part of the population, that being the elderly. This virus is not an economy-shuttering virus because of it's impact on people under 60, the vast majority of those under 60 who get it survive. So when it comes time to vaccinate, why would there be any other central goal that isn't to stop people from dying? Let's be honest, if old people weren't dying from this virus at the levels they are we wouldn't even be talking about COVID, it would just be another flu. If old people aren't dying, then the economy never shuts down, people don't get unemployed, and the disparate impact on minorities would never materialize. The central goal of the committee should have nothing to do with health inequities and everything to do with saving lives.

He should have stopped at "it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks"

Isn't it racist to treat white people poorly because of past inequities? Most can admit that the pendulum of privilege has hovered over white people but why do we want to swing it past equilibrium to where it hovers over POC? Shouldn't we take a long term approach and try to level the playing field not tilt it in the other direction? If we punish whites for their past privilege in the long term we will just be creating future victims who will have a legitimate grievance.

Well, when someone is an “expert in ethics and health policy”, you gotta figure that’s where he’s gonna go. Rightly or wrongly.

[AZGrizFan]

Not even remotely. We went from two weeks to flatten the curve, to now EVERY life must be saved and we’ll stay locked down forever and destroy our economy to prevent even ONE more life lost. The “goals” have changed 100-fold since March.

Of course they’ve changed...that’s called learning. No one is suggesting we can save every life and locked down is a relative turn based on additional learning and acceptance of the CURRENT best science.

But you get to install new goal posts. They are based on long term health effects, long term healthcare costs, long term economic productivity costs (both lockdown related AND your best projections of the results of opening completely back up with zero restrictions and voluntary precautions (suggested reading: Sweden).

Your new goal posts are number of deaths (both directly related and systemic compromised healthcare system related).

Ready...go!

You sure use “long term” a lot for a virus that’s been here (allegedly) 10 months. If we’re going to base the goal posts on all those things you listed, we’re going to be shut down for the remainder of my natural life.

[AZGrizFan]

Yes we have and no they’re not. All numbers have meaning. Case counts drive hospitalizations and deaths. You were wrong back then too and nothing has changed...

How is that possible? I thought LA and Cali were locked down and there are stay at home orders?

Lockdowns kill.

[AZGrizFan]

Holy fuck! Are you kidding??? The goal posts to open back up are in constant motion.

Goalposts set by Politicians, exaggerated by News media, Facebook fake doctors, Karens, etc. You guys need to cut thru all that BS and look at the truth. Its right there in front of you, if you WANT to see it.

Please, Obewan....enlighten us?

[SDHornet]

[Gil Dobie]

Goalposts set by Politicians, exaggerated by News media, Facebook fake doctors, Karens, etc. You guys need to cut thru all that BS and look at the truth. Its right there in front of you, if you WANT to see it.

Please, Obewan....enlighten us?

My Doctors advice has stayed the same throughout this entire pandemic. He's not a politician, he's not a factbook fake Doctor or Karen, he's not a member of the news media. People keep looking for answers, believing fake crap, and the answer is pretty fucking simple.

[Gil Dobie]

We had a girl in my class that fainted at least once a year in school, over the 12 years we attended the same school. My nephew faints when you talk about people bleeding. A lot of people are queasy about needles.

[JohnStOnge]

Love how the goalposts keep moving with the China virus. No masks, now masks, everyone has to wear them, everyone is wearing them but now they aren't worn properly...

Stay locked down until a vaccine, but don't trust a vaccine developed while Trump is in office, oh now a vaccine is rolling out but we still have to stay locked down even after everyone gets it.

We have plenty of data to show who is at risk and who should be concerned. Anyone buying into the fear porn at this point is hopeless.

I would say that anyone who would type something like you typed there is hopeless.

The mask thing is simple. It has always been the recommendation that people who were infected and capable of transmission wear masks. The change in position is due to the realization that, with this virus, people can transmit when they are not showing symptoms. And, yes, masks have to be worn properly to be effective in preventing transmission.

Nobody said not to trust a vaccine while Trump is in office. Trump's behavior has caused doubt. But it has always been the case that people in the "limelight" have said that if the FDA says a vaccine if safe and effective they will accept that. Fauci has said it. Biden has said it. Many others have said it. They are not the problem.

A very large proportion of the population falls into the set of risk groups. Obesity is a risk group. More than one third of adults in the United States are obese. Diabetes is a risk group. About 10% of the population has diabetes.

You are in denial about the severity of the problem. You should stop.

[TheDancinMonarch]

Love how the goalposts keep moving with the China virus. No masks, now masks, everyone has to wear them, everyone is wearing them but now they aren't worn properly...

Stay locked down until a vaccine, but don't trust a vaccine developed while Trump is in office, oh now a vaccine is rolling out but we still have to stay locked down even after everyone gets it.

We have plenty of data to show who is at risk and who should be concerned. Anyone buying into the fear porn at this point is hopeless.

I would say that anyone who would type something like you typed there is hopeless.

The mask thing is simple. It has always been the recommendation that people who were infected and capable of transmission wear masks. The change in position is due to the realization that, with this virus, people can transmit when they are not showing symptoms. And, yes, masks have to be worn properly to be effective in preventing transmission.

Nobody said not to trust a vaccine while Trump is in office. Trump's behavior has caused doubt. But it has always been the case that people in the "limelight" have said that if the FDA says a vaccine if safe and effective they will accept that. Fauci has said it. Biden has said it. Many others have said it. They are not the problem.

A very large proportion of the population falls into the set of risk groups. Obesity is a risk group. More than one third of adults in the United States are obese. Diabetes is a risk group. About 10% of the population has diabetes.

You are in denial about the severity of the problem. You should stop.

This from the person who talks of sterilization of political opponents and/or denying them the right to vote. It is to laugh.

[kalm]

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

No offense, but this borders on stupid. The only reason we are in the position we're in, i.e. parts of the economy completely shuttered and millions unemployed, is that we want to stop the spread of the disease and limit the impact to the vastly most affected part of the population, that being the elderly. This virus is not an economy-shuttering virus because of it's impact on people under 60, the vast majority of those under 60 who get it survive. So when it comes time to vaccinate, why would there be any other central goal that isn't to stop people from dying? Let's be honest, if old people weren't dying from this virus at the levels they are we wouldn't even be talking about COVID, it would just be another flu. If old people aren't dying, then the economy never shuts down, people don't get unemployed, and the disparate impact on minorities would never materialize. The central goal of the committee should have nothing to do with health inequities and everything to do with saving lives.

Why would I be offended? I acknowledged the 2nd quote was a weaker argument. Which is what these comments are...simply ideas. It doesn’t mean they’re the correct path or that the author is racist. Like it or not, racial and socio-economic disparity plays a role in health outcomes and probably disease spread. There is also the obvious connection between race and essential work.

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your concerns over the racial components...it’s just a legit discussion that’s being had with many contributing factors so dismissing it as simply racist like Hogie did ignores some important inputs.

This article gives a good example of how the pandemic is not as simple as jabbing grandma.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... lity-rate/

[kalm]

Of course they’ve changed...that’s called learning. No one is suggesting we can save every life and locked down is a relative turn based on additional learning and acceptance of the CURRENT best science.

But you get to install new goal posts. They are based on long term health effects, long term healthcare costs, long term economic productivity costs (both lockdown related AND your best projections of the results of opening completely back up with zero restrictions and voluntary precautions (suggested reading: Sweden).

Your new goal posts are number of deaths (both directly related and systemic compromised healthcare system related).

Ready...go!

You sure use “long term” a lot for a virus that’s been here (allegedly) 10 months. If we’re going to base the goal posts on all those things you listed, we’re going to be shut down for the remainder of my natural life.

To quote Russell Wilson, “separation is in the preparation.”

The first human to (wild) mink transmission was discovered last week in Utah. So it’s gone from bats, mutated to infect humans, then mutated again to infect another mammal where it may spend years mutating until it makes a jump as a new critter back to humans again.

So...much...still...to...learn.

Understanding the virus and it’s potentials informs decision making, preventing further spread, with the potential for reducing/eliminating new restrictions and increased healthcare spending down the road.

[kalm]

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Believing out of context quotes in tweets is one thing but actually reading the entire article and coming to your conclusions is another level of triggered.

Try reading again. Hint :

“ Marc Lipsitch, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, argued that teachers should not be included as essential workers, IF a central goal of the committee is to reduce health inequities.

“Teachers have middle-class salaries, are very often white, and they have college degrees,” he said. “Of course they should be treated better, but they are not among the most mistreated of workers.”

This one leans closer to racism in its prescription but is still accurate in describing the playing field. It smacks more of white guilt (don’t know whether the professor is white so I guess I’m racist too) than racism. Personally, I’m not offended by the notion that minorities have had it tougher.

‘Harald Schmidt, an expert in ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, said that it is reasonable to put essential workers ahead of older adults, given their risks, and that they are disproportionately minorities. “Older populations are whiter, ” Dr. Schmidt said. “Society is structured in a way that enables them to live longer. Instead of giving additional health benefits to those who already had more of them, we can start to level the playing field a bit.”

So, you didn’t read the Tweets I posted...they both had pictures and bios of the two racists...

And anytime race is part of a decision on the distribution of medical services, that is classic racism...

I read the bios, both of which were attributed to the same quote.

Your second line is a nice idea and I agree to an extent. It also ignores socio economics.

[Col Hogan]

So, you didn’t read the Tweets I posted...they both had pictures and bios of the two racists...

And anytime race is part of a decision on the distribution of medical services, that is classic racism...

I read the bios, both of which were attributed to the same quote.

Your second line is a nice idea and I agree to an extent. It also ignores socio economics.

And I would argue that socio-economics should have nothing to do with administering this vaccine... Rich or poor should not determine who lives and who dies...which should be the total focus of health care...

In the article, there is lots of discussion on the list of who is essential and who isn’t...the list is way too broad...

I’m currently at my daughter’s house helping with the grandkids...both my daughter and S-I-L are teachers, and they feel teachers should not be on the essential list...I might disagree, because the reason I’m here is that the kids are elementary level, while she teaches at the high school level, and there is a difference in in-person, hybrid, and total virtual in this county between the grade levels...I think teachers should be essential and get the shot...

But there are jobs on that list that don’t belong on it, for various reasons...

BL (IMHO), we need to take care of health care workers and their immediate families first...then the elderly...then first responders and their immediate families...

Then, it’s anybodies guess on who goes next...

[kalm]

I read the bios, both of which were attributed to the same quote.

Your second line is a nice idea and I agree to an extent. It also ignores socio economics.

And I would argue that socio-economics should have nothing to do with administering this vaccine... Rich or poor should not determine who lives and who dies...which should be the total focus of health care...

In the article, there is lots of discussion on the list of who is essential and who isn’t...the list is way too broad...

I’m currently at my daughter’s house helping with the grandkids...both my daughter and S-I-L are teachers, and they feel teachers should not be on the essential list...I might disagree, because the reason I’m here is that the kids are elementary level, while she teaches at the high school level, and there is a difference in in-person, hybrid, and total virtual in this county between the grade levels...I think teachers should be essential and get the shot...

But there are jobs on that list that don’t belong on it, for various reasons...

BL (IMHO), we need to take care of health care workers and their immediate families first...then the elderly...then first responders and their immediate families...

Then, it’s anybodies guess on who goes next...

Agree with much of this...especially the difference between grade levels. Secondary kids should be able to learn from home with less detrimental effect on their learning not to mention they don’t require the supervision. I have a high school kid who’s missing out on his senior year but he gets it, has been more engaging with us, and is actually doing better in school and taking care of responsibilities.

Socio economics affects disease transmission and health outcomes. Shouldn’t be that way but it’s a reality.

[HI54UNI]

[Gil Dobie]

North Dakota issues the mask mandate on November 14th, around the peak on the chart. You can see cases dropped faster than SD

[Gil Dobie]

You previously acknowledged the people that were no wearing mask properly. Then there are those the wear shields, which is only for eye protection in addition to your mask. Then people with scarves and half-assed mask. If we went into a large store today and looked at everyone in the store. I bet we only find 25% wearing a proper mask and wearing it correctly, and not touching it with their hands.

I was in a large store today and paid particular attention to that. Saw ONE guy with a gator on. Everyone else had a mask of some sort, worn properly...can’t say whether they were old, or reused, or effective....but they weren’t gators or bandanas or the like.

I was in Target today. The Liberals appear to wear their mask much better than the Trumpers in Walmart.

[kalm]

North Dakota issues the mask mandate on November 14th, around the peak on the chart. You can see cases dropped faster than SD

There have also been multiple peer reviewed studies showing that Bison are smarter than Jackrabbits.

[UNI88]

Peaked at close to 2,000 cases per million, so the actual peak was somewhere between 500-1,000 cases?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk